Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-20-2019, 09:18 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 24,999

Is Hoda Muthana a US citizen & should she be allowed back in the US?


AP story here.

Basically, Hoda Muthana is a lady who left the US to join the Islamic State. She married twice; both husbands were killed while fighting. She had a son with one of the two men. She now says she regrets her decision (she was young, didn't understand things the way she does now, etc.) and wishes to return to the US with her infant son.
Quote:
U.S. officials contend that Hoda Muthana isnít a citizen and has no legal basis to travel to the U.S.

President Donald Trump says he decided to deny her return and that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo agrees with that decision. Pompeo says Muthana isnít a citizen and doesnít have a valid passport.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...27855145062411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald Trump
I have instructed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and he fully agrees, not to allow Hoda Muthana back into the Country!
Quote:
Pompeo announced on Wednesday that Muthana wonít be allowed to enter the country with her toddler son because she is not an American citizen, a claim that was challenged by her lawyer.
Quote:
Pompeo said she has no ďlegal basisĒ to claim American citizenship.
Quote:
He said on Wednesday in a statement that she ďwill not be admitted to the United States.Ē
This position apparently relies on whether or not her father was a diplomat when she was born.
Quote:
Her lawyer, Hassan Shibly, released a copy of her birth certificate and a letter from a U.S. official indicating her father was no longer a diplomat when she was born in 1994. Shibly says Muthana had a valid U.S. passport before she joined the militant group in 2014.
So: is Hoda Muthana a US citizen & should she allowed back in the US? If she is a citizen and is denied re-entry, are any of her civil rights being violated? Is there any due process that she is entitled to?
  #2  
Old 02-20-2019, 09:29 PM
OldGuy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Very east of Foggybog, WI
Posts: 5,188
If she has a US passport (and that should be easy to confirm) then baring some mistake at issuance, she must be either a citizen or a non-citizen national. The latter are people of Samoa or other outlying US possessions, and would hardly seem to apply. I don't see how she can be denied reentry unless and until it is proved that a passport was issued in error.

Last edited by OldGuy; 02-20-2019 at 09:29 PM.
  #3  
Old 02-20-2019, 09:33 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 24,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldGuy View Post
If she has a US passport (and that should be easy to confirm) then baring some mistake at issuance, she must be either a citizen or a non-citizen national. The latter are people of Samoa or other outlying US possessions, and would hardly seem to apply. I don't see how she can be denied reentry unless and until it is proved that a passport was issued in error.
If she does have or was issued a passport, are the President and Secretary of State violating any of her civil rights by saying she does not? Wouldn't that be slander at the very least?

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 02-20-2019 at 09:33 PM.
  #4  
Old 02-20-2019, 09:57 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,241
My very brief research seems to indicate that, yes, she's a U S citizen. She was born in the U. S. at a time after her father was a diplomat. The government seemed to agree when it researched her status and granted her a passport.

Since she's apparently a US citizen, she has her constitutional rights and should be afforded due process. Which simply declaring her not to be a citizen would not seem to meet the standard of due process.

I think she should be allowed back in, immediately taken into custody, and tried for any crimes, including treason and aiding terrorists, that she committed. But she should be allowed to argue to an actual judge that she doesnt deserve to rot in prison for her actions.

Last edited by Hamlet; 02-20-2019 at 09:59 PM.
  #5  
Old 02-20-2019, 10:05 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 12,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
... I think she should be allowed back in, immediately taken into custody, and tried for any crimes, including treason and aiding terrorists, that she committed. But she should be allowed to argue to an actual judge that she doesnt deserve to rot in prison for her actions.
I'd be good with this. Let her back in so we can try her for treason.
  #6  
Old 02-20-2019, 10:07 PM
JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 15,681
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldGuy View Post
If she has a US passport (and that should be easy to confirm) then baring some mistake at issuance, she must be either a citizen or a non-citizen national ... I don't see how she can be denied reentry unless and until it is proved that a passport was issued in error.
Right. And as for the obvious next questions, an act of treason or sedition does not ipso facto render you a non-citizen; and a voluntary renunciation of US citizenship has to be affirmatively made before a US consular official, not just inferred.

She returns, then faces whatever consequences may actually entail under law.

Last edited by JRDelirious; 02-20-2019 at 10:09 PM.
  #7  
Old 02-21-2019, 03:18 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,608
So, unlike the UK, the US government cannot withdraw US citizenship?
__________________
Quartz
  #8  
Old 02-21-2019, 03:40 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
So, unlike the UK, the US government cannot withdraw US citizenship?
Not really, no. The courts have clamped down on it to the point that it's basically impossible except when a naturalized citizen is shown to have committed fraud in the naturalization process.

It's still theoretically possible in certain circumstances, but one of the essential elements is that the person intended to give up their citizenship.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 02-21-2019 at 03:43 AM.
  #9  
Old 02-21-2019, 04:11 AM
Alessan's Avatar
Alessan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 23,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
So, unlike the UK, the US government cannot withdraw US citizenship?
Yeah, the U.S. can't just say that she's not their problem - she's a U.S. citizen, and anything she does, the U.S has to deal with.
  #10  
Old 02-21-2019, 04:15 AM
glee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Obama country
Posts: 15,298
Apparently it's a violation of international law to withdraw citizenship if it leaves that person stateless.
  #11  
Old 02-21-2019, 04:19 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by glee View Post
Apparently it's a violation of international law to withdraw citizenship if it leaves that person stateless.
The position of the Secretary of State appears to be that the USA isn't withdrawing her citizenship, but that she was never a citizen at all and that her passports were issued in error.
  #12  
Old 02-21-2019, 08:03 AM
andros is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Dejagore
Posts: 10,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Feldon View Post
The position of the Secretary of State appears to be that the USA isn't withdrawing her citizenship, but that she was never a citizen at all and that her passports were issued in error.
What a fascinating test balloon for withdrawing citizenship from other individuals. Naturalized citizens, perhaps.
  #13  
Old 02-21-2019, 08:17 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,568
Purely pragmatically, she's likely to have information that would be useful for US national security. Probably not actionable info for preventing terrorist attacks (i.e. "X bombing is planned for Y date"), but day-to-day insider knowledge of ISIS/allies culture, routine, hierarchy, etc. -- all of which might be very useful for future operations like infiltration and undercover ops. It seems to be the height of foolishness (and thus par for this administration) to reject this potential benefit out of hand to make some sort of political point.
  #14  
Old 02-21-2019, 08:31 AM
BwanaBob's Avatar
BwanaBob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 4,059
I was under the impression that joining the armed forces of another "country" cost you your American citizenship. Is this not accurate?
__________________
Go wherever you can be
And live for the day
It's only wear and tear
-IQ
  #15  
Old 02-21-2019, 08:39 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 8,342
IANAL but as I understand it, the facts are she's not only a US citizen, but a citizen by birth, which is the stronger type of citizen. The United States could rescind her citizenship if she were naturalized by claiming she violated her oath of loyalty to the United States.

A United States citizen can voluntarily give up their citizenship, but that is a lengthy legal process - you're not relieved of your tax obligations in doing so, either.

On the other hand, a United States citizen can be stripped of their citizenship involuntarily, but that is a formal process and it's not simply up to the president or his cabinet members to decide by decree. The strongest argument that Trump and Pompeo have is that she took up arms against the United States, but the key is that a person has to do so with, among other things, the intent to give up citizenship. Finding and capturing a US citizen who joined Al Qaeda doesn't deprive him of citizenship - it has to be established that he did so for, among other reasons, the purpose of relinquishing his US nationality. The subject of intent has to be debated in court - the president can't just declare 'it is so.'

Of course what the president can do is hang the threat of a treason conviction and the most extreme legal remedies available over the head of the accused, and collaterally, the family who cares for her well-being.

But what Trump is doing is, once again, daring the courts to stop him. They probably will force him to give in at some point, but he could drag the process out and make it expensive for her family to bring her back home, only to find US prosecutors waiting to chew her up once she gets here. I don't envy her or her family at all.

Wanted to add, there's a good article on this from NOLO, who are more qualified to comment on the matter than I am:

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...tizenship.html

Last edited by asahi; 02-21-2019 at 08:40 AM.
  #16  
Old 02-21-2019, 08:54 AM
elbows is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 14,098
It’s ironic, don’t ya think, that this all came to light a day after the Trump called for other nations to take back their foreign fighters and NOT leave them in Syria?

The problem will be if they are sent to trial (for aiding and abetting?), in their home countries, the evidence to convict will be impossible to attain/verify. They will walk free. If they are tried where they are, they will simply claim it’s politically motivated revenge, and not impartial justice. Unfair!

The problem really is that they’ve been radicalized once already. And could radicalize others quite simply by the attention and fame they will definitely receive. They will be in every headline, do every interview, be on every talk show. They’ll be writing books, becoming social media influencers, etc, etc. There is nothing to impede any of this from happening, and they most certainly know it!

The British girl has openly admitted severed heads in buckets were no big thing for her! They withdrew her citizenship saying she technically qualifies through her Bangladeshi mother for citizenship there. Which Bangladesh immediately denied. The rule about not being allowed to make one stateless is going to come into close examination in the days ahead I think.

Already there are issues with nations trying to deport foreign criminals back to countries that then refuse to take them, denying they are theirs! People living for months in airports caught transiting somewhere, unable to move forward or back. Something needs to change but no one seems to have any ideas how!

What a mess!
  #17  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:06 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,041
There are plenty of Americans, and others, who have extensive experience in deprogramming rescued cult members. This one seems to have already largely deprogrammed herself, and she's willing to come face justice. Denying that, including fabricating excuses not to do it, is just fearmongering. And don't we want to understand better what motivates a person to take such actions, so we can help prevent it among others? Let her come and tell us.
  #18  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:08 AM
Falchion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,025
I think I would need more information to have an opinion. It is agreed (I think) that children born to certain diplomats do not get birthright citizenship. And it is agreed (I think) that at some point prior to her birth, her father was present here as a qualifying diplomat.

As I understand it that her family claims that the father was discharged (fired?) roughly a month prior to her birth thus bringing into question his status as a diplomatic official. As I read the USCIS guidance, the key question isn't really whether he was a "diplomat" at the time of her birth, but whether he was listed on the State Department's "Blue List" at the time of birth. cf. 8 CFR 101.3 ("Foreign diplomatic officer means a person listed in the State Department Diplomatic List, also known as the Blue List."). So, I'd want to know if the father was still listed a month after his discharge (which seems possible, since the internet suggests that the Blue List is published every six months). And I'd want to know if there is a procedure for someone who is still on the list (which is the regulatory definition) but is no longer, in fact, a diplomat. (I suppose I'd also be curious about the status, if any, of a person who is in the country on a diplomatic visa, but has been discharged from office).

Last edited by Falchion; 02-21-2019 at 09:09 AM.
  #19  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:19 AM
catflea12 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 240
The US can revoke citizenship for treason, but it has to be proven first.
  #20  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:19 AM
elbows is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 14,098
I was most assuredly NOT denying anything, nor fabricating anything, certainly not fear mongering.

For someone so into listening and investigating what they may have to teach us, you seem remarkably reticent to even acknowledge the complexities these countries are actually facing. These are the issues they will have to struggle with selling to their citizens.

These people WILL be famous when they get back. It’s already happening in Britain, that girl is doing an interview every day. That’s not a crime. But it’s a reality that will have impact. It seems foolish to just ignore all that.

I for one, think we’ll get to a better place by actually addressing ALL the realities, not refusing to talk about the uncomfortable parts.
  #21  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:21 AM
Falchion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falchion View Post
I think I would need more information to have an opinion. It is agreed (I think) that children born to certain diplomats do not get birthright citizenship. And it is agreed (I think) that at some point prior to her birth, her father was present here as a qualifying diplomat.

As I understand it that her family claims that the father was discharged (fired?) roughly a month prior to her birth thus bringing into question his status as a diplomatic official. As I read the USCIS guidance, the key question isn't really whether he was a "diplomat" at the time of her birth, but whether he was listed on the State Department's "Blue List" at the time of birth. cf. 8 CFR 101.3 ("Foreign diplomatic officer means a person listed in the State Department Diplomatic List, also known as the Blue List."). So, I'd want to know if the father was still listed a month after his discharge (which seems possible, since the internet suggests that the Blue List is published every six months). And I'd want to know if there is a procedure for someone who is still on the list (which is the regulatory definition) but is no longer, in fact, a diplomat. (I suppose I'd also be curious about the status, if any, of a person who is in the country on a diplomatic visa, but has been discharged from office).
In an effort to answer my own question, under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, "[w]hen the functions of a person enjoying privileges and immunities have come to an end, such privileges and immunities shall normally cease at the moment when he leaves the country" or after a reasonable period of time but "shall subsist until that time" Article 39(2). Which suggests that immunity continues from discharge until departure. So, if the logic is that a child born in the United States is not entitled to citizenship is they have a parent that has diplomatic immunity, then I would also want to know if her father exited the country (and returned) after his discharge.

Last edited by Falchion; 02-21-2019 at 09:23 AM. Reason: Typos
  #22  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:27 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,041
The family also claims that she had been issued a US passport at one time. That would be a very quick thing for the State Department to check.
  #23  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:35 AM
DesertDog is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mesa, Ariz.
Posts: 5,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
I'd be good with this. Let her back in so we can try her for treason.
No, she should be allowed back and put on display, so to speak.

"I joined ISIS at nineteen because I was young and stupid. I grew disenchanted with it because <reasons> and came back. Don't you fall into the same trap I did."

You'd think someone who plays 4-dimensional chess would consider that.
  #24  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:41 AM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 34,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDog View Post
No, she should be allowed back and put on display, so to speak.

"I joined ISIS at nineteen because I was young and stupid. I grew disenchanted with it because <reasons> and came back. Don't you fall into the same trap I did."

You'd think someone who plays 4-dimensional chess would consider that.
I agree with this, with the caveat of 'if she didn't commit any crimes'. She should definitely be brought in and questioned, but if she didn't commit any actual crimes then yeah, she could be the poster child for why pulling up stakes and going to live in a tent as an ISIS bride is a bad idea. She could relate her experiences to those who might be thinking of doing similarly stupid things. I understand that a lot of these girls were attracted by basically trolls on internet message boards, saying how great it was and how happy they would be. This would be a good counter message, if the various women who have come back saying how bad it was hasn't been enough.

I don't know enough about the case, but if she was given a US passport and her citizenship was already looked at (basically, she was born here and her dad wasn't a diplomat at the time of her birth), then what Trump et al are doing seems both weak and stupid. If nothing else, let her back in so she can be interrogated and, if she committed crimes let her be tried and sentenced through our system, as any citizen should be.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #25  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:44 AM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by andros View Post
What a fascinating test balloon for withdrawing citizenship from other individuals. Naturalized citizens, perhaps.
Do you think it's wrong in principle that anyone's naturalized citizenship should ever be revoked? If there are certain things that would have barred you from naturalization, and you are later found out to have lied about something substantial during the naturalization process, it doesn't seem wrong to me that the potential exists to have naturalization revoked.

Of course, that begs the question of what would be serious enough to justify revocation, and it sounds highly dubious whether this is really applicable in this case. There should still be adequate due process - I'm not advocating that the government should be able to revoke on a whim for ulterior motives. But if someone were found to have lied about a serious criminal history?

In any event, it certainly seems wrong that a naturalized citizen could have citizenship revoked because of actions they took after naturalization. They should have the same right to due process as all citizens.

Last edited by Riemann; 02-21-2019 at 09:48 AM.
  #26  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:46 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,364
I dunno. The state departments pretty clear that one can lose ones US citizenship by either swearing allegiance to another nation or taking up arms for another nation without seeking permission first.

If she did either of those things with the caliphate then thereís a legal case to be made against her.

I agree that we donít have enough data to really make a ruling here. Iím sympathetic to her, sure. But she is an adult. And on some things you donít get take backs.
  #27  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:48 AM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 34,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
I dunno. The state departments pretty clear that one can lose ones US citizenship by either swearing allegiance to another nation or taking up arms for another nation without seeking permission first.

If she did either of those things with the caliphate then thereís a legal case to be made against her.

I agree that we donít have enough data to really make a ruling here. Iím sympathetic to her, sure. But she is an adult. And on some things you donít get take backs.
Are women allowed to swear oaths of allegiance to ISIS? I have no idea but seems like it wouldn't be a thing for them. And you are right...if she did those things then that's definitely an issue. That doesn't seem to be what Trump et al are using to stop her though, unless I'm misunderstanding what they are asserting.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #28  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:49 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 12,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDog View Post
No, she should be allowed back and put on display, so to speak.

"I joined ISIS at nineteen because I was young and stupid. I grew disenchanted with it because <reasons> and came back. Don't you fall into the same trap I did."

You'd think someone who plays 4-dimensional chess would consider that.
I think a conviction for treason and an execution sends basically the same message, but more emphatically.
  #29  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:50 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 24,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
I dunno. The state departments pretty clear that one can lose ones US citizenship by either swearing allegiance to another nation or taking up arms for another nation without seeking permission first.
Can you offer a "pretty clear" cite for that? Because we've already had it asserted that it takes a deliberate act of renunciation of one's citizenship to lose it.

ETA: From the NOLO link provided by asahi:
Quote:
Committing any of the following acts will create a presumption that it was performed voluntarily with the idea of giving up U.S. citizenship, although the person may later be able to rebut (disprove) this presumption:
  • Becoming a naturalized citizen of another country after age 18.
  • Formally declaring allegiance to a foreign government after age 18.
  • Accepting a position in the government of another country after age 18, if one has citizenship in, or declared allegiance to, that country.
  • Joining the military force of another country either (1) in any capacity if that country is engaged in hostilities against the U.S., or (2) as an officer.
  • Formally renouncing U.S. nationality abroad before a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer.
  • Formally renouncing U.S. nationality in the U.S. when the U.S. is at war, if done in writing and with the approval of the U.S. Department of Justice.
  • Being convicted of treason or participating in any attempt to overthrow the U.S. government.

The act must be accompanied by a specific intent to relinquish U.S. nationality.

For all the acts listed above, it is not enough to appear to commit the act--even voluntarily--to lose U.S. nationality; the person must also commit the act in order to relinquish the nationality.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 02-21-2019 at 09:54 AM.
  #30  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:52 AM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
I dunno. The state departments pretty clear that one can lose ones US citizenship by either swearing allegiance to another nation or taking up arms for another nation without seeking permission first.

If she did either of those things with the caliphate then thereís a legal case to be made against her.
Is this applicable to all citizens, or specific to naturalized citizens?
  #31  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:56 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,364
https://travel.state.gov/content/tra...tionality.html

It was linked upthread. Hell, I remember that being clearly stated on my first passport application as a kid. I was 11 or 12 and they still made it all clear.
  #32  
Old 02-21-2019, 10:05 AM
Folly's Avatar
Folly is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago! (no more burbs)
Posts: 2,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
https://travel.state.gov/content/tra...tionality.html

It was linked upthread. Hell, I remember that being clearly stated on my first passport application as a kid. I was 11 or 12 and they still made it all clear.
From the link:

Quote:
Administrative Presumption of Intent to Retain U.S. Citizenship

As already noted, the actions listed above will result in the loss of U.S. nationality if performed voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. nationality. The Department has adopted an administrative presumption that U.S. nationals intend to retain United States nationality when they: obtain naturalization in a foreign state (INA 349 (a)(1)); declare their allegiance to a foreign state (INA 349(a)(2)); serve as an officer in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States (INA 349(a)(3)); or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government (INA 349(a)(4)). In accordance with the administrative presumption, when an individual commits one of the foregoing acts, that person will retain U.S. nationality unless he or she affirmatively, explicitly, and unequivocally asserts an intention to relinquish such nationality.
  #33  
Old 02-21-2019, 10:40 AM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
I dunno. The state departments pretty clear that one can lose ones US citizenship by either swearing allegiance to another nation or taking up arms for another nation without seeking permission first.

If she did either of those things with the caliphate then thereís a legal case to be made against her.

I agree that we donít have enough data to really make a ruling here. Iím sympathetic to her, sure. But she is an adult. And on some things you donít get take backs.
Emphasis mine.

Yes, there's a legal case. You may (or may not) be able to demonstrate that she has renounced her citizenship in a legal setting, through legal procedures, and then let the chips fall where they may.

Or, you can treat her as a citizen and prosecute as such.

The President and Secretary of State proclaiming that they're simply blocking her re-entry doesn't seem to satisfy any legal procedure. What a shock -- this administration feels no obligation to act under the rule of law.
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #34  
Old 02-21-2019, 10:50 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 8,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by catflea12 View Post
The US can revoke citizenship for treason, but it has to be proven first.
I'd be more worried of a conviction than deportation.
  #35  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:00 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 8,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
https://travel.state.gov/content/tra...tionality.html

It was linked upthread. Hell, I remember that being clearly stated on my first passport application as a kid. I was 11 or 12 and they still made it all clear.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I think the issue is that the president and DoS can't just assert that someone is or isn't a citizen - that gets litigated. A US citizen, particularly one who is born here, has the right to due process. I think that's the rub - Trump and Pompeo are trying to deny her due process.

To be frank, I'm not sure she's going to like due process once Trump's justice department is finished with her, but the real problem isn't so much that they could make the legal claim that she's no longer a citizen - they absolutely could. The problem I see, and I'm guessing others here see it as well, is the possibility that Trump may just say 'screw the courts'. Moreover, this isn't just punishing an individual; denying her citizenship seems to be inching ever closer to punishing a family, and it could even be perceived by Muslim Americans or Americans of Middle Eastern descent as community punishment as well, which is serious business, IMO.
  #36  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:04 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 13,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by BwanaBob View Post
I was under the impression that joining the armed forces of another "country" cost you your American citizenship. Is this not accurate?
Only if it's a hostile nation. If you join the military of a friendly nation (and especially, if it's by conscription as opposed to your own free will - i.e., Israel, Taiwan or Finland) - then you are OK.

But none of that applies to this case.
  #37  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:08 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 8,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDog View Post
No, she should be allowed back and put on display, so to speak.

"I joined ISIS at nineteen because I was young and stupid. I grew disenchanted with it because <reasons> and came back. Don't you fall into the same trap I did."

You'd think someone who plays 4-dimensional chess would consider that.
That would be the smart move. I'm too lazy to Google at the moment, but from what I recall in reading and researching the topic several years ago, the body of research out there, including some conducted by our own military, seems to indicate that it's observably more effective to rehabilitate and reintroduce alienated people back into society than it is to inflict misery.

This instead seems to have Stephen Miller's fingerprints all over it. This is an attempt to use an Arab American as a "foreign scum" poster child.

What she did by leaving the country and experimenting with ISIS is scummy, but she was also young and she appears to be showing remorse. Moreover, we don't really know what she actually did, and whether the worst of what she may have done was done on her own volition or whether she was coerced.
  #38  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:07 PM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
I'd be good with this. Let her back in so we can try her for treason.
I rarely agree with you given our different political views, but here Iím in complete agreement. Have her return, arrest her, and charge her with treason. From what I gather the evidence is pretty solid. Unless her argument is that she is not an American the case seems like it would be a slam dunk.
  #39  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:20 PM
Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 40,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
I think a conviction for treason and an execution sends basically the same message, but more emphatically.
No, that sends the message "if you screw up and realize you did, don't ever set foot in the US again" combined with "Uncle Sam is scared of stupid little teenagers".
__________________
Evidence gathered through the use of science is easily dismissed through the use of idiocy. - Czarcasm.
  #40  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:21 PM
andros is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Dejagore
Posts: 10,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
I rarely agree with you given our different political views, but here Iím in complete agreement. Have her return, arrest her, and charge her with treason. From what I gather the evidence is pretty solid. Unless her argument is that she is not an American the case seems like it would be a slam dunk.
...and then execute her? Pour encourager les autres?
  #41  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:30 PM
doreen is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Woodhaven,Queens, NY
Posts: 6,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
To be frank, I'm not sure she's going to like due process once Trump's justice department is finished with her, but the real problem isn't so much that they could make the legal claim that she's no longer a citizen - they absolutely could. The problem I see, and I'm guessing others here see it as well, is the possibility that Trump may just say 'screw the courts'. Moreover, this isn't just punishing an individual; denying her citizenship seems to be inching ever closer to punishing a family, and it could even be perceived by Muslim Americans or Americans of Middle Eastern descent as community punishment as well, which is serious business, IMO.

My understanding is that there is no claim that she's no longer a citizen - the claim is that she was never a citizen. She was apparently born a month after her father was discharged from his diplomatic post - but I haven't seen anywhere that describes the basis for her parents still being in the US after she was born. If they stayed on non-diplomatic visas or got green cards, she's a citizen. If they stayed here illegally, she's a citizen. But I read somewhere earlier today ( can't find it) that a diplomat who leaves/is removed from his post will retain immunity for some short period of time in order to make necessary arrangements (to move , obtain a visa) - that seems plausible and in that case she would not be a citizen.
  #42  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:31 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. •
Posts: 11,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
I rarely agree with you given our different political views, but here Iím in complete agreement. Have her return, arrest her, and charge her with treason. From what I gather the evidence is pretty solid. Unless her argument is that she is not an American the case seems like it would be a slam dunk.
Is joining ISIS alone an act of treason against the U.S.?
  #43  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:38 PM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus
Is joining ISIS alone an act of treason against the U.S.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Constitution
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
ISIS is an enemy of the US, and joining them is both levying war against the US and aiding ISIS in doing so.

Of course, she's young and naive, and probably didn't understand fully what she was doing, and it is her first offense. So, hang her.

Regards,
Shodan
  #44  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:41 PM
Falchion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by doreen View Post
My understanding is that there is no claim that she's no longer a citizen - the claim is that she was never a citizen. She was apparently born a month after her father was discharged from his diplomatic post - but I haven't seen anywhere that describes the basis for her parents still being in the US after she was born. If they stayed on non-diplomatic visas or got green cards, she's a citizen. If they stayed here illegally, she's a citizen. But I read somewhere earlier today ( can't find it) that a diplomat who leaves/is removed from his post will retain immunity for some short period of time in order to make necessary arrangements (to move , obtain a visa) - that seems plausible and in that case she would not be a citizen.
It is unclear whether the Administration is arguing that she no longer a citizen or that she never was a citizen. But, as I noted above, under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, a diplomat (or spouse/family member) retains immunity after the completion of the diplomatic assignment until he leaves the country or for a "reasonable time." Assuming Muthana was born roughly at term, and was born about a month after the completion of the diplomatic tour, then it seems entirely plausible that her mother would have been seen as too far along to travel and been allowed to remain in the United States for the duration of the pregnancy, while retaining her diplomatic status and privileges. And, by extension, making her child not a United States citizen at birth.

The more I think about this, the more I think that Muthana is not a US citizen and never was. But again, we don't know what arguing the Administration is making (which, frankly, makes some of the more strident rejections seem a bit premature).
  #45  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:52 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. •
Posts: 11,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
ISIS is an enemy of the US, and joining them is both levying war against the US and aiding ISIS in doing so.

Of course, she's young and naive, and probably didn't understand fully what she was doing, and it is her first offense. So, hang her.

Regards,
Shodan
Is ISIS an enemy of the U.S.? I'm not saying they're not, but what's the basis for saying they are?
  #46  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:59 PM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,568
People who try to kill you are generally seen as enemies.

Regards,
Shodan
  #47  
Old 02-21-2019, 01:00 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 8,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by doreen View Post
My understanding is that there is no claim that she's no longer a citizen - the claim is that she was never a citizen. She was apparently born a month after her father was discharged from his diplomatic post - but I haven't seen anywhere that describes the basis for her parents still being in the US after she was born. If they stayed on non-diplomatic visas or got green cards, she's a citizen. If they stayed here illegally, she's a citizen. But I read somewhere earlier today ( can't find it) that a diplomat who leaves/is removed from his post will retain immunity for some short period of time in order to make necessary arrangements (to move , obtain a visa) - that seems plausible and in that case she would not be a citizen.
That's different from what I've read, but I've only read 1 or 2 articles so far - that would be an interesting twist.
  #48  
Old 02-21-2019, 01:06 PM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
Is joining ISIS alone an act of treason against the U.S.?
I donít see how itís any different than if an American had joined the Vietcong during the Vietnam war, or the Iraqi military during either war with Iraq, or joined the Taliban, etc. No, those werenít formally declared wars, but I think itís a losing argument to claim that ISIS is not an enemy of the US.
  #49  
Old 02-21-2019, 01:10 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 12,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
Is ISIS an enemy of the U.S.? I'm not saying they're not, but what's the basis for saying they are?
My understanding (from earlier treason threads) is that "enemy" means people we're engaged in military hostilities with. That would seem to include ISIS.
  #50  
Old 02-21-2019, 01:16 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 14,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
My understanding (from earlier treason threads) is that "enemy" means people we're engaged in military hostilities with. That would seem to include ISIS.
It's interesting to note that the U.S. has not formally declared war on another country since WWII, but we have, indeed, been engaged in military hostilities with a number of countries and groups since then (including a continuous state of this, in various parts of the Middle East, since late 2001).
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017